← Library
Madras High CourtWP/26677/2024allowed

P.Arumugham v. The Managing Director

2024-09-12Honourable Ms Justice R.N.Manjula4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 12.09.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA P.Arumugham ... Petitioner Vs.

The Managing Director, Metropolitan Transport Corporation (Chennai Ltd.) Pallavan House, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.

... Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent to pay the wages to the petitioner as per the order dated 10.12.2014 in P.W.Case No.10/2013 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Labour, DMS Complex, Teynampet, Chennai 600 006 and confirmed by the Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes in P.W.A.No.1/2023 dated 01.03.2024. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Chandrakanthan For Respondent : No appearance

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent to pay the wages to the petitioner as per the order Page No.1 of 4

dated 10.12.2014 in P.W.Case No.10/2013 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Labour, DMS Complex, Teynampet, Chennai 600 006 and as confirmed by the Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes in P.W.A.No.1/2023 dated 01.03.2024.

2. Heard Mr.V.Chandrakanthan, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record.

3. The petitioner has raised an application before the Assistant Commissioner of Labour under Payment of Wages Act and in which, an order has been passed on 10.12.2014 in favour of the petitioner. The respondent challenged the same by preferring an appeal before the learned Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai in P.W.A.No.1 of 2023. By virtue of the order dated 01.03.2024, the order of the Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Chennai, was confirmed by the Chief Judge of Court of Small Causes and the matter attained finality. Under such circumstances, the respondent has got obligation to implement the above order. As the respondent has not implemented the order so far, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking appropriate directions. Page No.2 of 4

4. It appears that the petitioner has given a representation in this regard and the same has not been considered so far. The respondent cannot have any objection to implement the order as the order has attained finality as stated above. Since the petitioner's representation is not considered in the light of the above order, I feel the respondent has to be given with an appropriate direction.

5. In view of the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed and the respondent is directed to implement the order dated 10.12.2014 in P.W.Case No.10/2013 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Labour, DMS Complex, Teynampet, Chennai 600 006 and as confirmed by the Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes in P.W.A.No.1/2023 dated 01.03.2024 by making the payment due to the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Index : Yes /No 12.09.2024 Speaking / Non-speaking gsk Page No.3 of 4

R.N.MANJULA , J.

gsk To The Managing Director, Metropolitan Transport Corporation (Chennai Ltd.) Pallavan House, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.

12.09.2024 Page No.4 of 4